The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Categorical Data Analysis
Abstract
The classical statistical tests are based on the initial formulation of two complementary hypotheses that are related to the parameters of the target population; these hypotheses are the null and the alternative hypotheses. The null hypothesis, denoted by H0, is the hypothesis that is to be tested. The alternative hypothesis, usually denoted by Ha, is the hypothesis that contradicts the null hypothesis (Rosner, 2010); usually, the alternative hypothesis will be related to a research hypothesis. To assess the null hypothesis, a sample of data is collected to compute a test statistic for supporting a decision in favor of or against the H0; there are four possible outcomes: 1. Evidence in favor of H0, with H0 in fact being true 2. Evidence against H0, though H0 is in fact true (Type I error) 3. Evidence in favor of H0, though H0 is in fact false (Type II error) 4. Evidence against H0, with H0 in fact being false In classical statistics, the probabilities of the occurrences of these outcomes are summarized in the following table: The general aim in hypothesis testing is to use statistical tests that make α and β as small as possible. Typically, the evidence against H0 is determined with a significance level less than or equal to 5%, while a statistical power of 80% or higher is considered adequate.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
PLINK: a tool set for whole-genome association and population-based linkage analyses.
Purcell, S., Neale, B., Todd-Brown, K., Thomas, L., Ferreira, M. A. R., Bender, D., Maller, J., Sklar, P., de Bakker, P. I. W., Daly, M. J., et al. (2007) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1086/519795 · Cited by 34,089
Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution
Bolker, B. M., Brooks, M. E., Clark, C. J., Geange, S. W., Poulsen, J. R., Stevens, M. H. H., & White, J.-S. S. (2009) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2008.10.008 · Cited by 8,910
Unbiased Recursive Partitioning: A Conditional Inference Framework
Hothorn, T., Hornik, K., & Zeileis, A. (2006) · Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics · doi:10.1198/106186006x133933 · Cited by 4,021
A Study of sexuality and health among older adults in the United States
Lindau, S. T., Schumm, L. P., Laumann, E. O., Levinson, W., O'Muircheartaigh, C. A., & Waite, L. J. (2007) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa067423 · Cited by 2,211
Red Media, Blue Media: Evidence of Ideological Selectivity in Media Use
Iyengar, S., & Hahn, K. S. (2009) · Journal of Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.01402.x · Cited by 1,940
Metadata
- Venue
- Biostatistics in Public Health Using STATA
- Publisher
- CRC Press
- Published
- 2016-03-03
- Pages
- 81-88
- OpenAlex
- W3148300490
- Cited by
- 1,037
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 107.52
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Categorical Data Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1201/b19547-8
- The paper
- Categorical Data Analysis. (2016). Biostatistics in Public Health Using STATA. https://doi.org/10.1201/b19547-8
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.